Q+A-Could Israel-Iran standoff turn violent?

page: 1
0

log in

join

posted on Jul, 18 2009 @ 03:16 PM
link   

Q+A-Could Israel-Iran standoff turn violent?


www.reuters.com

July 16 (Reuters) - Israel's confrontation with Iran over Tehran's nuclear programme is a major source of uncertainty in the Middle East and a complication in a wider stand-off between Iran and the West.Here is a look at where matters stand.



COULD ISRAEL LAUNCH A NUCLEAR STRIKE AGAINST IRAN?

It's a poker game with high stakes and a degree of bluff. Israeli leaders refuse to rule out any option. They do not believe Iran's assurances it wants only nuclear energy. Noting re-elected Iranian President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad has said Israel should be "wiped off the map", Israel says an
(visit the link for the full news article)




posted on Jul, 18 2009 @ 03:16 PM
link   
A summary of a few events...... Seems a bit too pro-attack Iran. The headers for a start: "WHAT MIGHT HOLD ISRAEL BACK?" "WOULD ISRAEL GO IT ALONE, WITHOUT U.S. BACKING?" "HOW MIGHT ISRAEL ATTACK IRAN?"

And this:

Militarily Israel can also deploy the following forces:

AIR -- 500 combat aircraft, including F-15s and F-16s able to bomb Iran's west, and further with aerial refuelling, a technique for which the air force has been training. Planes could overfly hostile Arab states using stealth technology. Armed with "bunker buster" bombs that could be released with accuracy outside Iran's airspace. Israel is also assumed to have dozens of Jericho missiles designed to carry nuclear warheads to the Gulf. It is unclear Israel would make a pre-emptive nuclear strike.


It is unclear about a pre-emptive nuclear strike?!! WTF?!! They bloody better not!!!

If Russian scientists got vaporised in Iran, Russia would take that as an act of war, and retaliate with nuclear weapons.

www.reuters.com
(visit the link for the full news article)


[edit on 18-7-2009 by john124]



posted on Jul, 18 2009 @ 03:21 PM
link   
If we keep hearing about it, eventually people are going to be apathetic when it becomes a reality. Don't let that happen. Shut up about Iran, get it out of peoples' heads as much as possible.


I don't want to hear about Iran anymore. Especially if I am hearing that we are sending bombers over, shortly thereafter there will be an invasion, and shortly after that we will implement a draft to have the "human resources" to fight them, Afghanistan and Iraq at the same time.

[edit on 18-7-2009 by bsbray11]



posted on Jul, 18 2009 @ 03:37 PM
link   
Yes, Iran will launch a missile into Israel at night !!!

Mark my insanity !!


Unless tptb reads this post, it will be at day time !



posted on Jul, 18 2009 @ 03:44 PM
link   
Oh my dear jesus...they are STILL using *wipe off the map* these people are a complete insult to journalism in every way possible.
and thats not enough thumbs down.As for an attack...the report does seem very pro killing innocent people en mass.I dont know what to think anymore,all i can say is that if Israel strikes first iran has every right to defend itself,and im sure they will.Hopefully though it doesn't happen.



posted on Jul, 18 2009 @ 04:22 PM
link   
I live in Israel, i do not trust current Iranian leadership and i am 100% sure that Iranian nuclear program is military-oriented one. However i strongly object (and if it would be in my power would not allow) using nuclear weapons first. Pre-emtive nuclear strike to prevent Iranian nuclear program is immoral ,insane and counter productive. It would hurt Israel much more then Iran, and it would be used as an excuse by all regional powers to create they own nuclear programs.
Solomon - what Ahmadinejad did say and how do you interpriate i wonder....



posted on Jul, 18 2009 @ 04:39 PM
link   

Originally posted by ZeroKnowledge
I live in Israel, i do not trust current Iranian leadership and i am 100% sure that Iranian nuclear program is military-oriented one. However i strongly object (and if it would be in my power would not allow) using nuclear weapons first. Pre-emtive nuclear strike to prevent Iranian nuclear program is immoral ,insane and counter productive. It would hurt Israel much more then Iran, and it would be used as an excuse by all regional powers to create they own nuclear programs.
Solomon - what Ahmadinejad did say and how do you interpriate i wonder....


If you live in israel... invest in a fallout shelter!!


The second israel sends one up, 40 will come right back.



posted on Jul, 18 2009 @ 04:39 PM
link   

Originally posted by ZeroKnowledge
I live in Israel, i do not trust current Iranian leadership and i am 100% sure that Iranian nuclear program is military-oriented one. However i strongly object (and if it would be in my power would not allow) using nuclear weapons first. Pre-emtive nuclear strike to prevent Iranian nuclear program is immoral ,insane and counter productive. It would hurt Israel much more then Iran, and it would be used as an excuse by all regional powers to create they own nuclear programs.
Solomon - what Ahmadinejad did say and how do you interpriate i wonder....


If you live in israel... invest in a fallout shelter!!


The second israel sends one up, 40 will come right back.



posted on Jul, 18 2009 @ 04:46 PM
link   
reply to post by breakingdradles
 


It is not 40 that worry me - Israel is a small country so everything would end then really quick and relatively painless. It is one and fallout and all the crap later what worries me.
By the way - i wonder why people who say that they really care for Palestinians (like Ahmadinejad and others) have no problem with 40 nukes falling on those people too. They surely are not guilty and those 40 nukes would be a little more problematic for them then all Israeli bombs combined....
We do live side by side, you know?



posted on Jul, 18 2009 @ 04:50 PM
link   
Shoddy reporting by Reuters because Israel does not have 500 combat aircraft.

Israel won't use nukes. Israel won't attack Iran. The former is a silly proposition if pre-emptive and the latter is politically a non-starter.

Not good news for the war-mongers. Just let Iran fall apart in its own time.

Regards



posted on Jul, 18 2009 @ 04:58 PM
link   

Originally posted by paraphi
Shoddy reporting by Reuters because Israel does not have 500 combat aircraft.

Israel won't use nukes. Israel won't attack Iran. The former is a silly proposition if pre-emptive and the latter is politically a non-starter.

Not good news for the war-mongers. Just let Iran fall apart in its own time.

Regards


en.wikipedia.org...


Equipment
High quality main battle tanks 1030
Medium and low quality tanks 1980
APCs, IFVs, ARVs, LCVs 7070
Self-propelled artillery 1254
Combat warplanes 874
Transport warplanes 76
Training warplanes 171
Military helicopters 286
Heavy SAM batteries 25
Warships 13
Submarines 3
Patrol boats 50


Something says otherwise.

[edit on 18-7-2009 by john124]



posted on Jul, 18 2009 @ 05:02 PM
link   

Originally posted by ZeroKnowledge
reply to post by breakingdradles
 


It is not 40 that worry me - Israel is a small country so everything would end then really quick and relatively painless. It is one and fallout and all the crap later what worries me.
By the way - i wonder why people who say that they really care for Palestinians (like Ahmadinejad and others) have no problem with 40 nukes falling on those people too. They surely are not guilty and those 40 nukes would be a little more problematic for them then all Israeli bombs combined....
We do live side by side, you know?


If your reffering to me, I never said I wanted 40 nukes to rain down on israel.

Quite the opposite infact.

You do know my stance on the government of israel, but like Americans, I think the vast majority of citizens are innocent, like you and myself.

I would have a problem with a nuke harming anyone but netanyahoo




[edit on 18-7-2009 by breakingdradles]





top topics
 
0

log in

join